BTW, at this point I'm more concerned that we get a release out than
what it is called. I do think Pig is stable enough for 1.0 but I'm
not willing to let version numbering get in the way of getting a
release out. More frequent releases is better for the community.
Nige
On Mar 23, 2009, at 1:30 PM, Nigel Daley wrote:
+1.
On Mar 23, 2009, at 1:26 PM, Alan Gates wrote:
To address Santhosh's concerns that 1.0 is not an appropriate
release number, I propose that we release the same code under the
name 0.2.0.
Alan.
On Mar 20, 2009, at 11:54 AM, Santhosh Srinivasan wrote:
-1 on the 1.0.0 release. IMHO, Pig is relatively stable but not
quite
there. I would prefer 0.2.0
1. 1.0.0 signifies a highly stable and solid release which will
require
a little bit more work.
2. Multi-query support will break the way users are using grunt
3. There are ongoing efforts for changing load and/or store
interfaces
Santhosh
-----Original Message-----
From: Olga Natkovich [mailto:ol...@yahoo-inc.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 3:21 PM
To: pig-dev@hadoop.apache.org
Subject: [VOTE] Release Pig 1.0.0 (candidate 0)
Pig Committers,
I have created a candidate build for Pig 1.0.0.
This release represents a major rewrite of Pig from the parser
down. It
also introduced type system into Pig and greatly improved system
performance.
The rat report is attached. Note that there are many java files
listed
as being without a license header. All these files are generated by
javacc.
Keys used to sign the release are available at
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/hadoop/pig/trunk/KEYS?view=markup.
Please download, test, and try it out:
http://people.apache.org/~olga/pig-1.0.0-candidate-0
<http://people.apache.org/~olga/pig-1.0.0-candidate-0>
Should we release this? Vote closes on Friday, March 20th.
Olga
